Absolutely, BrotherDavid—let’s bring some clarity where confusion creeps in.
You’re right that Mary was the mother of the man Christ Jesus, not the eternal Spirit of God. She gave birth to the Son, not to the Father. Let’s stay anchored in Luke 1:35:
“That holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”
Not the Father. Not the Eternal Spirit. The Son—the man, the flesh, the human nature God took on for our redemption.
To call Mary the “Mother of God” as if she birthed deity itself is a theological category error. It confuses the Creator with His own incarnation. God didn’t begin in Bethlehem—He stepped into time there. Mary gave birth to what God became, not to who God eternally is.
So yes—Jesus is God.
But Mary is the mother of His humanity, not the source of His deity.
And God has no Father, no origin, and certainly no genealogy above Himself.
To twist that into calling her the “Mother of God” the way Rome does? That’s not honoring Mary—it’s misrepresenting the God she obeyed.
Let’s keep the glory where it belongs:
Not in a womb—but on the throne. God was manifest in the flesh (1 Tim. 3:16), but never born into existence.
Amen Final Word !
Ephesians 4:4-6
Authorized (King James) Version
4 *There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
I know when God filled me with the Holy Ghost the Father came to in-dwell my vessel, which is also the Spirit of Christ…Christ in us !!
[Colossians 1:27
to whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory
When a person is filled with the Spirit (Holy Ghost) he is NOT filled with three persons, but the Spirit of the one true and living God.
Colossians 2:9
Authorized (King James) Version
9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
This verse does not imply that Jesus was multi-personality…there were not two other persons living inside of Jesus !! Rather He is God and He is all in all
Amen, BrotherDavid—we are absolutely standing on the same foundation when it comes to Ephesians 4 and Colossians 2:9. There’s one God, not three. One Spirit, not a trio of divine roommates. When someone is filled with the Holy Ghost, they’re not hosting a conference of divine persons—they’re indwelt by the Spirit of the living God, who is also called the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9). That’s not Trinitarian juggling—that’s straight Scripture.
And yes—Colossians 2:9 doesn’t say “a third of God dwelt in Jesus” or “one person out of three showed up in flesh.” It says the fullness—everything that makes God who He is—dwells in Him bodily. That’s not a board meeting inside a Nazarene—it’s the invisible God made visible.
No split personalities. No divine hierarchy. No thrones with nameplates.
Just Jesus.
The name above every name.
The fullness of the Godhead in one Lord, one body, one Spirit.
Final Word indeed. Christ in you, the hope of glory.
That’s not three persons trying to fit into one vessel.
Appreciate the candor, The_Omega—and I’ll give it to you straight, no sidestepping:
I’m Trinitarian. Through and through.
But not the fluffy, philosopher-in-a-cardigan version that needs a chalkboard to explain God like He’s a math problem. I’m talking biblical Trinitarianism—Father, Son, and Holy Ghost: not three gods, not one God playing dress-up, but one eternal Being revealed in three distinct Persons, fully united, fully divine, and utterly inseparable.
So if you found yourself saying “Amen!” to what I wrote—good. That just means there’s more Trinitarian truth in the Word than some folks realize when it’s served without the creeds and complications.
Yes, the Spirit is Christ in us.
Yes, the fullness of God dwells in Christ.
Yes, we don’t receive “three Spirits” when we’re filled—we receive God Himself.
But that doesn’t mean the Son is the Father or that the Spirit is just the Son in ghost mode. It means the one true God—triune by nature, not by tradition—is working in perfect unity for our redemption.
So don’t let the clarity confuse you. Sometimes the Bible sounds Oneness… until you let it finish the sentence.
And when it does, it always lands on Trinity—not as a word, but as a revelation.
A central point of contention between Trinitarian and Oneness Pentecostals is the nature of the Sonship of Jesus Christ. Trinitarians assert that the Sonship is an eternal relationship within the Godhead, while Oneness Pentecostals often argue that it is a temporary state that will cease after the final judgment.
To explore this issue, let’s consider the scriptural evidence. Does the Bible suggest that the Sonship is a permanent or temporary aspect of Jesus’ relationship with God?
1 Corinthians 15:24 states, “Then comes the end, when he will deliver over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every rule and every authority and power.” This passage seems to imply that Jesus’ role as Son will eventually come to an end.
However, in 1 Corinthians 15:28, we read, “And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all.” This verse suggests that even after all things are subjected to the Son, he will still be subject to the Father.
How do we reconcile these two passages? Does the Bible indicate that the Sonship is a temporary state that will eventually cease, or is it an eternal aspect of the Godhead?
It’s the ultimate cliffhanger isn’t it.
I believe Jesus is the interactive part of God.
John tells us that he spoke the world into existence on day one.
John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. KJV
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. KJV
Jesus was made flesh.
This obviously infers Jesus existed before human birth.
What was He before He was made flesh?
Spirit, again obviously.
So Jesus, could have manifested Himself and spoke those words.
Remember also, the world will keep going another 1000 years of so after Jesus begins His reign.
So maybe after the last person gets let into heaven, then we can understand what 1 Corinthians 15 is about.
I hope this helps a little bit.
Great question, The_Omega—and finally, we’re diving into the deep end of the pool where precision matters and half-truths get exposed. You’ve hit on a critical divide: Is the Sonship of Christ eternal or temporary?
Let’s sharpen the sword and go straight to Scripture and sound doctrine.
The Oneness Claim:
Oneness Pentecostals often teach that the Sonship began at the Incarnation and ends after the final judgment. They argue that Jesus’ role as the “Son” was a temporary manifestation—a human office used by God for redemption—and that after the Kingdom is delivered to the Father (1 Cor. 15:24), the role of “Son” dissolves back into the singular divine essence. The Son is, in their view, not eternal.
But that collapses under the weight of the Word.
1 Corinthians 15:24–28 – Not the end of Sonship, but the fulfillment of mission
“Then comes the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father…”
“…that God may be all in all.”
Here’s what’s actually happening:
This isn’t the end of the Son—it’s the climax of His redemptive role as Mediator.
The Son is not erased—He submits, not ceases.
This is not about dissolving identity, but completing mission.
Hebrews 7:24 says: “But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.”
Jesus remains our high priest forever—in His glorified human form, as the Son. You don’t stop being the Son just because you’ve handed the keys to the Father.
Eternal Sonship: What does Scripture say?
Let’s stack the verses that Oneness theology has to sidestep:
John 17:5 – “Glorify Me with the glory I had with You before the world was.”
→ The Son pre-existed with the Father—not just the Word, but the Son in relationship.
Galatians 4:4 – “God sent forth His Son…”
→ He didn’t send a plan or future role. He sent someone who already existed as Son.
Hebrews 1:2 – “…by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds.”
→ The worlds were made by the Son—not by a mere title, but by a preexistent Person.
Revelation 21:22–23 shows “the Lamb” present in eternity.
→ The Lamb is not a temporary office. He is the eternally glorified Christ, still the Son.
The Real Danger of Denying Eternal Sonship:
If the Son is just a temporary role, then:
Who was in the beginning with God?
Who created the world?
Who intercedes forever (Hebrews 7:25)?
Who is returning? The Father in disguise?
No, friend. That road leads straight into heresy and confusion.
Trinitarianism Gets It Right:
The Son is eternally begotten, not created, not temporary.
He has always existed in loving relationship with the Father and Spirit.
His Sonship is not a role—it’s His identity.
The submission in 1 Cor. 15:28 isn’t inferiority, it’s order—the same Son who eternally loves the Father continues to glorify Him, even when the redemptive mission is complete.
Final Word:
The Son doesn’t vanish in eternity.
He doesn’t dissolve into divine mush.
He remains forever: the visible image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15), the Lamb on the throne (Rev. 22:1), the eternal Word made flesh (John 1:14).
Oneness theology has to terminate the Son to preserve their system.
Trinitarian theology lets Scripture speak—and the Son shines forever.
He’s not just the Redeemer of time. He’s the Son of eternity.
The critique misunderstands and misrepresents the Oneness position by framing it as if the “Son dissolves back into essence,” which oversimplifies and distorts the deeply biblical and Christ-centered view Oneness theology actually holds. Oneness Pentecostals do not believe that Jesus ceases to exist, nor that the glorified humanity of Christ disappears. Instead, we affirm with clarity and conviction that the Sonship—that is, the distinct role and redemptive function of God manifest in flesh—began at the Incarnation (Galatians 4:4, Luke 1:35) and was for the purpose of redemption (Hebrews 2:14–17; Philippians 2:7–9). The “Son” is not an eternal Person distinct from the Father, but rather the human manifestation of the one indivisible God (1 Timothy 3:16), by which God revealed Himself fully and sacrificially in time.
When 1 Corinthians 15:24–28 says the Son will deliver up the Kingdom to God the Father and be subject, it clearly teaches a conclusion to the mediatorial role of the Son. It does not mean the glorified Christ ceases to exist—far from it. The glorified Jesus remains the visible, eternal expression of God. But the function of mediating between God and man—the role of the Son as High Priest and intercessor—reaches its divine fulfillment. The redemptive office concludes because redemption is complete and perfect. Christ remains forever the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15), but not as a second eternal person coexisting alongside the Father in an eternal hierarchy. That idea is foreign to Scripture and born from post-apostolic philosophical creeds.
The Oneness view does not “collapse under the weight of the Word”—it rests upon the plain and consistent witness of the Word: that “God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19), and that Jesus is both Lord and Christ—God manifest in glorified humanity. The Sonship does not vanish; it is fulfilled. The Lamb on the throne (Revelation 22:3) is not a separate divine person, but the one God revealed forever in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:6).
This bears repeating from an earlier post just in case you missed it or to refresh your memory.
We should consider the dual nature of Christ in the framework of biblical terminology. The term “Father” refers to God Himself—God in all His deity. When we speak of the eternal Spirit of God, we mean God Himself, the Father. “God the Father,” therefore, is a perfectly acceptable and biblical phrase to use for God (Titus 1:4). However, the Bible does not use the phrase “God the Son” even one time. It is not a correct term because the Son of God refers to the humanity of Jesus Christ. The Bible defines the Son of God as the child born of Mary, not as the eternal Spirit of God (Luke 1:35). “Son of God” may refer to the human nature or it may refer to God manifested in flesh—that is, deity in the human nature.
“Son of God” never means the incorporeal Spirit alone, however. We can never use “Son” correctly apart from the humanity of Jesus Christ. The terms “Son of God,” “Son of man,” and “Son” are appropriate and biblical. However, the term “God the Son” is inappropriate because it equates the Son with deity alone, and therefore it is unscriptural.
“Mary was the mother of the flesh that God manifested Himself in as the Son of God…The “man” Jesus Christ not mother of the eternal God who has no beginning nor ending. Yes Jesus is God, but Jesus had a dual nature Son of man and Son of God. If Mary is the mother of God, then who would be the Father’s Father ?” Brother David
Peace to all,
The powers of the Trinity exister as personal Gods in being and are The Father The Mother and The Son in One Holy Spirit Family One God inbeing.
Thanks for reading David, please let me know if this helps in your question,
Thanks,
Stephen
Brother David’s question is the example of the failed logic in Today’s Trinity Logic. How can one understand God if the Holy Spirit is a person? And How can we understand the Trinity for what is really is A Family of the One God in being without The Mother? Without The Mother not together with the Father and The Son all preexisting personal Gods in being before creation was ever created was even created in the Trinity Family in One Holy Spirit Family One God in being a Holy Family? Just logically, rhetorically asking?
To me, Today, OMNILogically David should become to know the real logical rational and faithful Family Of God and The One Holy Spirit Family One God in being, OMNILogically.
And again I could be wrong because this logic is only presented in a generalization, for all.
“The Parable of the OMNIlogic of becoming One”, by Stephen
Baptism and Penance are Sacraments from Death through Life created by The Father from the Spirit in the New Adam through the flesh in The New Eve becoming The Transformed Christ in all mankind through Jesus becoming again immortally glorified and incorruptibly transfigured One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Baptized becoming flesh immortality from the New Eve Confirmed from Holy Spirit incorruption through the New Adam in The Christ in all mankind from Sacrifice and Penance becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
In all generalization, is Failed Creation from The Father through the Power of The Holy Spirit Family in both Natures spirit and life becoming flesh immortality from The Mother, Mary, God of Mercy transforming all mankind becoming flesh immortality from the Powers of The Holy Spirit Family Holy Spirit Family One God in being Holy Spirit incorruptibility from the Powers of The Holy Spirit Family One God in being Jesus becoming From the Immaculate Conception through the Virgin Birth of The Christ becoming in all mankind From The Powers of the Holy Spirit through the Immaculate Flesh for the Christ in all mankind from Holy Spirit Incorruption through flesh immortality in both natures spirit and life in One Body of our own Christ from the cross from where the blood and water flowed for all becoming again reborn from New Eve, Mary becoming immortality through Holy Spirit incorruption through the New Adam, Jesus in the Christ in all mankind becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
TO me Mary is in the Trinity and The Holy Spirit is The Family of God preexisting becoming again From the Father through The Mother for the Son in The Christ becoming again in all One Holy Spirit Family One God in being,
Romans 11:36 Everything is from him and through him and for him. Glory belongs in him forever! Amen!
From Him the Father
Through Him The Mother, In Romans there could be a gender mistranslation or perhaps social blunder faux pas not seeing the Mother of God as female in the Trinity from 1st ans 3rd century Forefathers of the Trinity Tertullian and Praxeas missed it leaving out “The Woman in the Word”, the Queen of Heaven, saying Mary is not in the Trinity, needing my call number form the 21st Century, perhaps saying, “Where is Stephen?” We don’t get this logic quite right yet, this logic is just not quite ready," perhaps Tertullian “Where is Stephen.”
For Him Jesus
In Him One Holy Spirit family One God in being in all mankind.
To me, the incorruptible Mind of God becomes to creation from the failed spirit nature through the power of Creation from The Father through the Mother for the Son each Gods in His, non-gender better said all-genders because the Holy Spirit Family of God is all genders and mankind and saints and angels and Gods in One Holy Spirit One God in being Powers in the Holy Spirit Family One God in being as God of Creation. They could not call me ank ask from 1st and 3rd century times and even till today, until OMNILogicalGod.
Born Corrupt in Creation From The Father flesh nature corruption becomes from the living waters of Baptism through the New Eve becoming flesh nature immortality from the Power of The Holy Spirit Family of One God in being through the God of Mercy Mary for immaculate flesh immortality in the New Eve in all mankind.
From Adam and Eve created failed from the corrupt spirit through their created souls for their mortal flesh in the body becoming transformed flesh nature immortality from the New Eve transformed from the living waters of Baptism through the souls of all for the Body becoming from death to life in the flesh becoming Holy Spirit incorruption from the Power of Holy Spirit through the Virgin Birth for the New Eve in Jesus becoming The Christ in all mankind from Sacrifice through Penance Absolution through Confession through Penance forgiven for all mankind to become through both New Eve flesh nature and New Adam Holy Spirit incorruption Nature through New Eve immortally becoming One Body glorified and New Adam incorruptibility Holy Spirit transfigured becoming again One Holy Spirit Family of God One God in being.
I have been thinking about what you said, and it makes sense to me old covenant.
Thanks, David and what you say is true.
To meet time, reversal allows us to look in the mirror and see ourselves from behind in theory.
We know not to preach or proselytize and only generalize the faith for all and sharing the word
Christians interpret Deuteronomy in light of the New Testament, understanding that some laws are specific to the Old Covenant with Israel and are not directly applicable to Christians today. For example, the ceremonial laws regarding sacrifices and dietary restrictions are not seen as binding for Christians.
And logically the laws apply to the Natures of the God, becoming again One God you speak.
In generalizations The God of Abraham is a Two nature God becoming again in all One God in being.
My understanding is Moses wrote the Exodus so what could he know About the Two Nature God of Abraham except through Faith?
Old Covenant salvation saves only the spirits in the souls to the Bosom of Abraham. Flesh is lost becoming again in The Christ, both natures, God and Temple, spirit and life. We know nor to be left in the chasm ot Teh Bosom of Abraham HE has already emptied and closed and Jesus with flesh and all from teh chasm of Teh Bosom of Abraham crosses over with all and destroys the chasm of hell breaking down gates and tearing down walls binding Satan in his own home with His own flesh through death and resurrection all received for Heaven’s rebith and salvation from all from the blood and water fthrough the cross for the rebirth reopening the gates now reopened with all to the New Heaven and Earth, Heaven becoming again in One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
Logically, I see From the Spirit nature we become created through the created souls of all for the flesh out of The Bosom of Abraham, Moses delivers us through the Exodus from the One Nature fulfilling living sacrifice and Jesus delivers through the New Exodus the Two Nature, spirit and life becoming again from the New Living Sacrifice, unlike Moses turning water into blood, Jesus turns the water into wine then to blood that transforms into immortality flesh and glorifies and transfigures through Holy Spirit incorruption both natures, sprit and life, becoming together in One God in the One Body through two natures, God and Temple becoming again One Body in the God from the faith of Abraham in One God you speak.
Appreciate the response, The_Omega—and I hear the passion. But let’s not confuse consistency with accuracy, or rhetorical polish with biblical truth. You’ve laid out the Oneness position well—but now let’s put it under the weight of Scripture and see if it stands or crumbles.
First: The Core Problem
You say:
“The Sonship began at the Incarnation and concludes when redemptive work is finished.”
Let’s translate that: The Son is temporary. The Son is a function, not a person.
That’s the beating heart of Oneness theology. And that’s exactly what Scripture does not say.
So let’s weigh the claim:
John 1:1–2
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
“The same was in the beginning with God.”
If the Word (Logos) is just a “plan,” then plans aren’t “with” anyone—persons are. The Word was face to face with God (Greek: pros ton Theon). That’s relationship.
John 17:5
“Glorify Me with the glory which I had with You before the world was.”
That’s not a human nature reminiscing about eternity—it’s the eternal Son referencing shared glory with the Father before time. If the Sonship began in Bethlehem, this prayer makes no sense.
Hebrews 1:2
“By His Son… He made the worlds.”
Not by a “plan.” Not by future flesh. By the Son.
Creation happened through Him—because He preexisted it.
The “God the Son” Word Game
You argue:
“‘God the Son’ isn’t in the Bible, so it’s wrong.”
Neither is “Bible.” Or “omniscient.” Or “Millennium.” Or “rapture.” The question is not whether the phrase appears—but whether the concept is taught.
Hebrews 1:8 – “But unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.”
Right there. The Father calls the Son:
“O God.”
And the throne? Forever.
Not until the last trumpet. Not until the job is done. Forever.
So either the Son is eternal God, or Hebrews is lying.
1 Corinthians 15:24–28 – Redemptive Role Ends, Not the Person
Yes, the Son delivers the Kingdom to the Father.
Yes, He subjects Himself—because He came in flesh to fulfill that mediatorial role.
But subjection ≠ annihilation.
He doesn’t dissolve into divine essence like an actor removing a mask.
He remains the visible expression of the invisible God—eternally (Col. 1:15, Rev. 22:3).
Oneness theology says the Sonship is fulfilled.
Scripture says the Son is exalted forever (Phil. 2:9–11).
Bottom Line
You said:
“We can never use ‘Son’ apart from the humanity of Jesus Christ.”
Then explain:
How creation happened through the Son (Heb. 1:2).
How the Son was sent, not created (Gal. 4:4).
How the Son had glory with the Father before the world was (John 17:5).
The Oneness system requires the Son to have a beginning.
The Bible doesn’t allow it.
Final Word
The Sonship isn’t a phase.
It isn’t a mask.
It isn’t a temporary job title.
The Son is:
Eternal Creator (Heb. 1:2)
Everlasting King (Heb. 1:8)
Glorified High Priest forever (Heb. 7:24)
Lamb on the throne in eternity (Rev. 22:3)
You can’t delete Him at the end of the book.
You’ll still see Him when the last page turns.
So yes, God is one.
But that one God eternally exists as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Not three gods.
Not three modes.
Not three roles. Three Persons. One God. Forever.
I’ll be direct and gracious: what you’ve written is creative, imaginative, and overflowing with spiritual metaphor—but it’s not rooted in biblical doctrine.
Let’s deal with the core claim:
“The Trinity is a family: Father, Mother, and Son in One Holy Spirit Family.”
Brother, that’s not the Trinity. That’s theology by poetry, not Scripture.
Here’s the truth:
The Bible reveals Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—not Father, Mother, and Son.
Mary is blessed among women, but she is not a Person of the Godhead.
The Holy Spirit is not a feminine principle, a family structure, or a cosmic womb—it is the third Person of the Trinity, co-equal, co-eternal, divine.
The Trinity isn’t a human family—it’s divine identity:
The Father is not male like man is male.
The Son is not created.
The Spirit is not a maternal counterpart.
This is not about “the Mother being left out.” The Godhead isn’t missing a role—it’s complete in who He is.
“For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” – Colossians 2:9 “Go therefore and make disciples… baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” – Matthew 28:19 “I and My Father are one.” – John 10:30
Nothing in these verses leaves room for Mother Mary as a member of the Godhead. That is not omission—that’s divine order.
Now let me say this plainly, and with love:
The Gospel isn’t an OMNIlogic parable—it’s a blood-soaked, cross-centered reality.
Salvation isn’t from philosophical generalizations—it’s from repentance, faith in Jesus, and the Spirit’s work.
Theology isn’t true because it’s poetic—it’s true because it’s biblical.
So, Stephen, I appreciate your passion. But we need chapter and verse, not cosmic riddles. Jesus isn’t returning with a new interpretation—He’s coming back in glory to judge and reign as the Son of God, the Lamb, and Lord of all.
May your heart stay soft, and may your theology stay anchored in the Word, not in mystical analogies.
Peace always—in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
Thank you for your thoughtful response and your continued desire to engage deeply with spiritual truth. I can tell your heart is reaching for the fullness of God—but I want to gently and firmly point something out:
Your reflections are fascinating, but faith is not built on mystical poetry or speculative generalizations. It’s built on divine revelation—“Thus saith the Lord.”
Let’s get real clear:
The God of Abraham is not “becoming again.”
“I am the LORD, I change not.” – Malachi 3:6 “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.” – Hebrews 13:8
God is not becoming. God is. He’s not evolving into oneness—He is One. Deuteronomy 6:4 isn’t a process—it’s a proclamation.
The Two Natures of Christ
Yes, Jesus is both fully God and fully man. That’s orthodox Christology, and it’s rooted in Scripture:
“The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us…” – John 1:14 “Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh…” – 1 Timothy 3:16
But you’re describing the two natures of Christ like they’re cosmic metaphors or stages of divine reincarnation. That’s not biblical. That’s mysticism with a Bible verse taped on.
Moses, the Bosom of Abraham, and Speculation
Yes, Moses had faith. Yes, saints under the Old Covenant were comforted in what Jesus called “Abraham’s Bosom” (Luke 16). But your idea of souls being built from the Bosom or Jesus weaving wine into immortality through Marian flesh metaphors—that’s not exegesis. That’s creative theological poetry.
Interesting? Sure.
Biblical? Not in the slightest.
We need the Word rightly divided:
“Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.” – 2 Timothy 4:2
Not parables of your own making, not OMNIlogic poetry, but the clear gospel of Christ crucified, risen, and coming again.
Final Thought:
Stephen, I believe you’re sincere. But sincerity doesn’t sanctify speculation.
Jesus didn’t say, “Go into all the world and share mystical generalizations.”
He said: “Teach them to observe all I have commanded you.” – Matthew 28:20
The faith once delivered to the saints is not an allegory. It’s a blood-stained cross, an empty tomb, and a coming King.
Let’s keep it there.
Peace to you—truthfully, scripturally, and always.
I mean this in a good way, but could you please explain to me the two nature God of Abraham, so that I can understand you know who the god of Abraham truly is?
True SincereSeeker, That’s what Tertullian said and Praxeas in the first and third century before they realized or could realize the faith of Abraham is a god of two natures.
To me the problem today is uniting in Christ tried to do it through two natures from one father through one mother for one son in the Christ, becoming again one Holy Spirit, family, one God in being
If we can’t see the Trinity right, we can’t see the Holy Spirit family of God correctly and we can’t see the mother in the Trinity and no way to correctly become reborn and saved to unite as one in being, omnilogicallly god.
I’m not asking out of sarcasm. I’m asking for clarity, because your phrase “the two nature God of Abraham” isn’t found in Scripture—anywhere. And when we start building theology on undefined terms, we trade revelation for speculation.
So I’m asking plainly:
Who is the “two nature God” of Abraham?
Is this a reference to the Incarnate Christ?
Or are you saying Abraham worshipped a God who had a dual nature before the Incarnation?
Because if you’re saying Abraham worshipped a God who was already flesh and spirit, you’ve departed from the Bible. The Son took on flesh in time—not before.
“The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” – John 1:14 “God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law.” – Galatians 4:4 “Before Abraham was, I AM.” – John 8:58
The I AM was always God.
But the Son was made flesh in time—not in Abraham’s day. Abraham knew God as Spirit (John 4:24), not through two natures, but through covenant, promise, and faith (Romans 4:20–22).
So again:
I’m not looking for a parable.
I’m not looking for a poem.
I’m asking for chapter and verse.
Because if the “two nature God of Abraham” can’t be shown from Scripture, it’s not revelation—it’s invention.
Let’s talk plainly, biblically, and truthfully.
Because truth doesn’t need a metaphor—it just needs a voice.
This critique oversimplifies and misrepresents the Oneness position by framing it in a way that suggests a denial of the Son’s significance or personhood. Oneness theology does not diminish the Son to a “mere function,” nor does it teach that Jesus is a temporary figure. Rather, it affirms that the Sonship—as a redemptive role—is the manifestation of the one eternal God in flesh for the purpose of salvation (1 Timothy 3:16; John 1:14). The Son is not a second person in an eternal tri-personal Godhead, but the visible expression of the invisible Spirit (Colossians 1:15) who came in time, through incarnation, to accomplish redemption.
When Oneness theology says the Sonship began at the Incarnation, it means the title “Son” applies to God’s humanity—the man Christ Jesus—born of a woman, made under the law (Galatians 4:4). This is not the same as saying Jesus is temporary. The man Christ Jesus, who is both fully God and fully man, is forever glorified and remains the eternal image of the invisible God (Hebrews 1:3; Revelation 22:3). But the role of mediating between sinful man and holy God—the priestly and redemptive office of the Son—reaches its divine fulfillment when the last enemy is destroyed and God is all in all (1 Corinthians 15:24–28).
The false dichotomy here is between “function” and “person.” In truth, Scripture teaches that Jesus Christ is one person—not one of three—but the only begotten Son who fully reveals the Father. To say that Sonship is not eternal is not to strip Christ of His personhood, but to rightly define the term “Son” as the incarnation of the eternal God for a specific, saving purpose. The glorified Christ remains forever, but Scripture never calls the Son an eternal co-equal person of a Trinity. That is read into the text—not out of it. Oneness theology does not deny the Son—it exalts Him as the full and final manifestation of the one true God.
This argument reflects a common Trinitarian reading of Scripture, but it rests on interpretive assumptions that are not demanded by the text and, at times, misapply the Greek grammar and context to fit a preexisting theological model. Let’s examine each passage carefully and in context.
John 1:1–2 says, “In the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word was with God (pros ton Theon), and the Word was God.” The phrase pros ton Theon does indeed carry a sense of “toward” or “in intimate relation with” God, but it does not necessarily imply a distinct divine person. The Greek term Logos does not mean “Son”—it means Word, and in Hellenistic Jewish thought (e.g., Philo), it referred to God’s self-expression, reason, or plan. In Hebrew theology, God’s Word was active, creative, and inseparable from Himself (Psalm 33:6; Isaiah 55:11). The Logos being “with God” and “was God” speaks of the Word’s identity with and distinction in expression within the Godhead—not a second person, but God’s self-revelation. The Logos becomes flesh in John 1:14—that is when the Son begins as the incarnation of the eternal Logos. The grammar supports divine intimacy, not divine duality.
John 17:5 reads: “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” This is Jesus praying in His humanity, not expressing an eternal second person. The “glory” Christ speaks of is not personal possession in eternity past but the predetermined glory He would assume as the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8; 1 Peter 1:20). The language is covenantal and prophetic. The Son did not “remember” pre-incarnate existence; rather, this is the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5) desiring the fulfillment of what was foreordained in God’s eternal plan (cf. Acts 2:23).
Hebrews 1:2 says, “By His Son… He made the worlds.” The Greek phrase di’ hou (“by whom”) uses dia with the genitive case, which can indicate agency or instrumentality—often translated as “through whom.” This does not necessitate a distinct, co-eternal person called “the Son” acting separately from the Father in creation. Instead, it points us to the eternal Logos, God’s self-expression and creative Word (John 1:1–3), who is now revealed as the Son. Hebrews is written from a post-incarnational perspective, identifying the one through whom God created all things as the very same who is now manifest in these last days as “Son.” In other words, the Logos who spoke the worlds into existence has become the Son in time through the Incarnation (John 1:14). The Son, then, is not a second divine person alongside the Father from eternity, but the eternal God—the Logos—made flesh. This interpretation preserves the unity of God and affirms that creation was indeed through the eternal Word, now revealed fully and gloriously in the Son, Jesus Christ.
So, the Oneness understanding remains consistent with both grammar and theology: the Logos always existed as God’s self-expression, but the Son began in the Incarnation. Jesus is the eternal God made visible in time—not a second person pre-existing beside the Father, but the Father Himself revealed in flesh (John 14:9; Colossians 2:9). This reading neither violates the text nor minimizes Christ; instead, it maintains biblical monotheism and honors the fullness of God manifest in the Son.
This rebuttal attempts to sidestep a crucial theological distinction by asserting that the absence of the phrase “God the Son” in Scripture is irrelevant, claiming instead that the “concept” is present. While it is true that some extra-biblical terms—like “omniscient” or “Millennium”—are used to describe biblical ideas, the phrase “God the Son” is not simply a neutral label. It introduces a theological structure foreign to the Bible’s language: namely, that there are multiple co-equal, co-eternal persons in one divine essence. The issue is not merely the term’s absence, but that the concept of “God the Son” as a distinct eternal person alongside “God the Father” and “God the Spirit” is never taught by Jesus or the apostles. Scripture does call Jesus “God,” but it never calls Him “God the Son” in a way that implies He is a separate person within a tri-personal deity. That distinction is post-biblical, born from Greek philosophical influence and formalized centuries after the apostles.
Regarding Hebrews 1:8, when it says, “But unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever,” this is a direct quotation from Psalm 45:6, a Messianic passage where God speaks prophetically of the royal Messiah. The Greek grammar and context of Hebrews show that the writer is exalting Jesus’ divine identity—not distinguishing Him as a second person. Hebrews 1 as a whole is emphasizing that the Son, as the full and final revelation of God (Hebrews 1:1–3), has a throne and dominion that is eternal because He is God manifest in the flesh. The passage affirms the deity of Christ without demanding a separate, eternal “God the Son” person.
Moreover, the Son’s throne being “forever” does not contradict the idea that the role of the Sonship has a redemptive purpose with a culminating fulfillment (1 Corinthians 15:24–28). Jesus remains the visible expression of the invisible God for all eternity (Colossians 1:15), but the office of the mediating Son concludes when redemption is complete—not His identity, not His deity, but the function that began at the Incarnation. Oneness theology upholds Hebrews 1:8 as a powerful affirmation of Jesus’ deity while remaining faithful to the biblical testimony that there is one God who was manifest in the Son—not two divine persons speaking to each other, but the eternal God revealed through His own manifestation in flesh.
This response rightly affirms the eternality of Christ’s glorified existence but mistakenly equates the continuation of Jesus as the visible expression of God with the eternal continuation of the Sonship as a distinct redemptive role. Oneness theology fully agrees that Jesus, the man Christ Jesus who is both God and glorified humanity, remains forever. He is indeed exalted forever (Philippians 2:9–11), and He is the Lamb on the throne, the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15). But what is often missed in Trinitarian interpretation is that Scripture distinguishes between who Jesus is and why the title “Son” was assumed in the first place. The Sonship is not a mere costume, nor is it annihilated—it is a role that began in time for the purpose of mediation (Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 2:14–17), and once the redemptive purpose is complete, it is delivered up—not destroyed, but fulfilled.
Philippians 2 doesn’t show the Son being exalted as a separate co-eternal person; it shows the man Christ Jesus, who humbled Himself, being exalted because of His obedience unto death. This exaltation doesn’t establish a second divine person—it highlights the glorification of the incarnate Logos. The distinction is not between persons within God, but between God in His eternal deity and God in His revealed humanity. Oneness theology does not teach that the person of Jesus ceases—rather, we affirm that the eternal God remains forever revealed in the glorified Christ. The Lamb is eternal, but the mediatorial function of Sonship—interceding between God and sinful man—finds its conclusion when death is destroyed and God is all in all (1 Corinthians 15:28). Jesus remains forever. The redemptive office of Sonship reaches its divine fulfillment. That is not annihilation; it is consummation.
The assertion that the Bible does not allow the Son to have a beginning misunderstands the very nature of biblical Sonship and imposes a theological framework foreign to the apostolic witness. Oneness theology does not deny the eternality of God, nor the preexistence of the Logos (Word), but it rightly affirms that the term “Son” is inseparably linked to the Incarnation—that is, the manifestation of God in flesh (John 1:14). Nowhere does Scripture ever use the term “Son” outside of contexts tied to the Incarnation, redemptive mission, or glorification of the man Christ Jesus. “Son” always implies begottenness, which denotes origin, not eternality (Luke 1:35; Hebrews 1:5; Galatians 4:4).
Hebrews 1:2, stating that God created the worlds “by His Son,” is written from a post-incarnation vantage point. The eternal God, who created all things through His Word (Logos), is now revealed as the Son. This does not mean the Son was active as a distinct person in Genesis—it means the same God who created is the same One now manifested as the Son (see also John 1:10).
Galatians 4:4 states, “God sent forth His Son, made of a woman,” which proves the opposite of what is claimed. The Son was not sent from a heavenly position of personal preexistence as a second divine being but was made of a woman, made under the law. The verb “sent” does not necessitate preexistence as a person—John the Baptist was also “sent from God” (John 1:6). In biblical usage, “sent” denotes divine commissioning, not necessarily eternal pre-incarnate identity.
John 17:5 reflects the prayer of the man Christ Jesus, desiring the fulfillment of the preordained plan—the glory prepared before the foundation of the world (1 Peter 1:20). This is not the Son reminiscing about shared pre-incarnate experience, but Christ anticipating the restoration of divine glory through His redemptive work.
The Oneness position does not diminish Jesus—it exalts Him as the one true God revealed in flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). The Son had a beginning—not Jesus as deity, but “Son” as the redemptive role and manifestation of the eternal Spirit in time. This is fully consistent with Scripture, whereas insisting on an eternal “Son” as a separate divine person injects philosophical categories the Bible never uses.
I want to offer a quick apology if any of my responses included repeated phrases or concepts—whether from you or myself. My intention wasn’t to be redundant or dismissive, but to ensure clarity and accuracy, especially when dealing with complex theological discussions where language precision really matters. Sometimes repetition can help anchor key points or maintain continuity in thought, but I realize it may come across as unnecessary at times. Thanks for your patience and for engaging respectfully in the conversation!
This statement reflects a deeply confused and theologically incoherent attempt to explain God, blending terminology from early church history, Trinitarian doctrine, and some mystical or speculative language. It misuses historical references—such as Tertullian and Praxeas—without understanding the context. Tertullian, a 2nd–3rd century apologist, was one of the first to articulate the Trinity using philosophical language, while Praxeas opposed such formulations, affirming the indivisible unity of God—a position more aligned with Oneness theology.
The phrase “the God of Abraham is a god of two natures” is a category error. The God of Abraham—YHWH—is pure Spirit (John 4:24), eternal and indivisible, not composed of “natures.” The concept of “two natures” arises in reference to the incarnate Christ (one divine, one human), not to God’s eternal nature. The God of Abraham was not understood as a Trinity or as a family of divine persons including a “mother”—that idea is foreign to both Jewish monotheism and apostolic Christianity.
Additionally, statements like “one son in the Christ, becoming again one Holy Spirit, family, one God in being” and “omnilogically god” are philosophical inventions, not scriptural truths. The Bible never teaches a “mother in the Trinity” or salvation through aligning with a divine family structure. The gospel calls us to be born again by water and Spirit (John 3:5), not by mystical speculation. The true unity of the Godhead is not three persons in a family, but one eternal Spirit fully revealed in Jesus Christ, the visible image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15; 2:9). Any system that adds speculative “family roles” or invents metaphysical hierarchies beyond Scripture leads to confusion, not truth.
So true, The_Omega, and to me, we have to be able to see all mankind as Sons and Daughters of God becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
“Tertullian, a 2nd–3rd century apologist, was one of the first to articulate the Trinity using philosophical language, while Praxeas opposed such formulations, affirming the indivisible unity of God—a position more aligned with Oneness theology.”
To me, Tertullian says the Father and the Son are in the Holy Spirit separately and the three persons The Father the Son and The Holy Spirit.
I say, The Holy Spirit cannot be a person and two people unless The Holy Spirit is really A Family of God and not a person. And I say if the Family is not the One Holy Spirit Family One God in being what is missing is a Personal God in being and this is Mary. I know no one seems to have the time or want to take the energy to think out this logic and to me most people would rather talk and deny and say what is not or what can’t be because it takes less energy. To me, talking and not listening, not thinking, takes less energy than talking and talking again not rationalizing logic for understanding. Thinking requires much more energy than talking talking saying the same thing over and over repetition requires no logical rethinking or dissimulation of thought patterns becoming from truth becoming again new thinking in understanding through energy being used by the mind to learn by listening, reading and listen. To me it’s hard work to listen.
The logical Trinity confusion, to me is that The Holy Spirit is seen incorrectly by the Forefathers of Teh Trinity and passed down even until today all wrong logically and The Holy Spirit is seen wrong as a person in being and The Person in being missing in the Trinity then, by Praxeas and Tertullian and everone else on earth and now what is missing in the Trinity is Mary, The Mother of God and The Holy Spirit is the Family of The One God in being.
Romans 11:36 For from him, The Father and through Her, The Mother and for him, Te Son, Jesus are all things. To him, The One Holy Spirit Family One God in being be the glory forever! Amen.
With Mary in the Trinity born again and saved is simple logically proving Mary it in the Trinity, for we are Born again New Eve Flesh transformed immortality saved through The New Adam in Holy Spirit incorruption becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
The uniting of the Three Powers of The Trinity is three persons, The Father The Mother and The Son in The Holy Family One God in preexistence becoming again in all One God in being. Jesus is God of Justice and The Eternal Priestly Authority of Spirit and Life becoming through the Immaculate Conception through teh Virgin birth of Jesus becoming the Christ becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being in all mankind. Revealed in Jesus and The Holy Family conceived through Jesus in The Christ are from the spirit nature through the flesh nature in One Body, Two Natures in Holy Family Body of Christ is the Family of The One God in being made the earthly image of the spirit God through the flesh. The Word, The Holy Family of God in Jesus is “The Christ” in all mankind. The Holy Spirit Family is the family of God spiritually becoming flesh in One Body OMNILogically and, to me is hierarchies beyond Scripture because we know if everything He taught on earth and in heaven were written not even the entire earth could hold the books which could be written.
Romans 11:36 For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.
To me, we cannot understand logically the Mind of God until we realize the mistake in logic from Forefathers and of the Trinity and even until today the Natures of the problem. I am seeking one person, and have not found this person yet that can confirm the Intelligence of logical creation undefiled becoming again in all One God. And infallible logical intelligence unfailing is From the Father through the Mother for the Son in the Christ becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being. And this same person mus be able to logically realize that the God o Abraham is the God of Two Natures, spirit and flesh becoming in One Body becoming again One Holy Spirit Family Body One God in being.
[quote=“The_Omega, post:139, topic:3453”]
The phrase “the God of Abraham is a god of two natures” is a category error. The God of Abraham—YHWH—is pure Spirit (John 4:24), eternal and indivisible, not composed of “natures.” The concept of “two natures” arises in reference to the incarnate Christ (one divine, one human), not to God’s eternal nature. The God of Abraham was not understood as a Trinity or as a family of divine persons including a “mother”—that idea is foreign to both Jewish monotheism and apostolic Christianity.
“Additionally, statements like “one son in the Christ, becoming again one Holy Spirit, family, one God in being” and “omnilogically god” are philosophical inventions, not scriptural truths. The Bible never teaches a “mother in the Trinity” or salvation through aligning with a divine family structure. The gospel calls us to be born again by water and Spirit (John 3:5), not by mystical speculation. The true unity of the Godhead is not three persons in a family, but one eternal Spirit fully revealed in Jesus Christ, the visible image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15; 2:9). Any system that adds speculative “family roles” or invents metaphysical hierarchies beyond Scripture leads to confusion, not truth.
[/quote]” The Omega 2025
The phrase "from him, through him, and for him are all things to Him be the glory.” appears in different Bible translations. Roman’s statement about God’s role in creation and everything that exists. The phrase essentially means that everything originates from The Father, is done through The Mother, and ultimately for Jesus has in One God as its purpose or destination.
From through for and in Logic.
The two nature God allows from creation of ONEness through three powers becoming through two natures, becoming again for ONEness in One Holy Spirit Family One God in Being.
From Three powers of the Holy Spirit Family One God in being through Jesus becoming the Christ in all mankind becoming again for ONEness of The Holy Spirit Family One God in Being.
From The Father through the Mother for the Son in the Christ becoming for ONEness in the ONEness
of The Holy Spirit Family One God in Being.
From the Failed Mortal Flesh Nature of Eve through the New Eve becoming for flesh immortality Nature in ONEness in One Holy Spirit Family One God in Being.
From the Failed Spirit corruption through Adam becoming for The New Adam becoming again glorified and incorruptibly transfigured ONEness in One Holy Spirit Family One God in Being.
From Failed Spirit Choice through loving or loving not for loving only and only loving with the most love becoming again in One Holy Spirit Family One God in Being.
“The gospel calls us to be born again by water and Spirit (John 3:5)” The Omega 2025
From the living waters of Baptism through the souls of all for the flesh Baptized to become transformed The New Eve from death to resurrection in the Church becoming again glorified and incorruptibly transfigured ONEness in One Holy Spirit Family One God in Being.
“The God of Abraham—YHWH—is pure Spirit (John 4:24), eternal and indivisible”
The Old Covenant salvation saves only the spirits in the souls of all to the Bosom of Abraham sending Old Covenant Saved only to the Bosom of Abraham for all awaiting The Christ in Two Nature becoming again ONEness from the Power of the ONEness of The One Holy Spirit Family One God in being through the souls of all for the flesh in the Body for Two Natures from the Power of The Holy Spirit Family incorruption through the New Adam for the Immortal Flesh in the New Eve for the Christ in all mankind becoming again from immortality through the New Eve for Jesus becoming The Christ conceived in all mankind by the One Holy Spirit Family of God becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
The Oneness Claim:
1 Corinthians 15:24–28 – Not the end of Sonship, but the fulfillment of mission
Eternal Sonship: What does Scripture say?
The Real Danger of Denying Eternal Sonship:
Trinitarianism Gets It Right:
Final Word:
First: The Core Problem
John 1:1–2
The “God the Son” Word Game
1 Corinthians 15:24–28 – Redemptive Role Ends, Not the Person
Bottom Line
Now let me say this plainly, and with love: